Colorado Supreme Court: Trump removed from ballot

[Dom]

https://edition.cnn.com/politics/live-news/colorado-trump-14th-amendment-12-19-23/index.html

There we go. 14th amendment finally happened. And my guess is this is only the beginning, there will be more states following the trend.

Trump's campaign finished?

Trump is an illegal candidate who cannot run for president in 2024?

[videomike_Ultimate_Plushie]

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

GoDevils!님이 먼저 게시:

The highest court in the land will overrule what happened in Colorado. The people that are trying to ban him based on January 6th are idiots. He said for their to be a peaceful protest and nothing more.

Nothing more? Uh, that is definitely not the full story.

Transcript Of Trump's Speech At Rally Before Capitol Riot
https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial

-> "And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore."

Hell as a word (outside of religious context) refers to destruction, chaos and torment.

Are you okay? Dude, the word "fight" does not mean destroy, maine, and kill. It means challenge, compete, enbattle. Have you never heard "fighting a legal battle?" He was never and has never spoken of violent revolution against the democrat party let alone actively taken part in planning and operating such endevours. And if all you have is the word "fight," well taken out of context for that matter despite even within the quote itself being self-evidently not saying maine & kill, then you need to back off a bit.

I'm not joking on this, your coming off as outright unhinged here. I'm outright concerned for your mental health if you seriously think the word "fight" must by all definitions means destruction and torment.

[Vince ✟]

Same people still trolling here it seems.

[Jackie Daytona]

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

These are violent extremists that want to tear down the country and its institutions. Democrats may have their own faults to criticize but I have not heard anyone from that side advocating for civil war or trying to justify it.

Really? Because a big part of their mantra is disobeying anyone that isn't a full-blown socialist. Disobeying the police. Disobeying any laws they don't like. Screaming outside of homes of politicians that make decisions they don't like.

Democratic leadership promotes all that. They abuse every rule and twist every fact.

Dems have been making war for some time now. Fostering hate. Via mass psychological manipulation. Through schools, news, and entertainment. Even going so far as to say that you can't be racist to white people. (Which is literally dehumanization.)

Dems aren't calling for civil war? Maybe not, directly. But it's what they want. Through destruction of societal norms. When everything is acceptable? Nothing is tolerated. You can't criticize anything. Because everything is fine.

So, if you have a problem with something? You're the bad guy. Not the person that caused the problem.

I also think that denying one party's nominee from running is the biggest threat to democracy that I've seen in my lifetime.

[Dom]

videomike_Ultimate_Plushie님이 먼저 게시:

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

This is exactly the dangerous rhetoric that extremists are using to justify their actions. Because the country was founded with blood in hands, that means it's okay to have hands in blood today.

No. No. NO.

These are violent extremists that want to tear down the country and its institutions. Democrats may have their own faults to criticize but I have not heard anyone from that side advocating for civil war or trying to justify it.

What these people don't understand is that the more violent and threatening they act, the more they are also proving Biden correct when Biden spoke about MAGA extremists that don't stand for peace and stability, and who want to see chaos and destruction.

Okay you're both off you rockers. This country was formed by formal rebellion and yes, even if the protesters has broken down doors as a show of force to a GOVERNMENT building, emphasis on government, it would be in the spirit of this country. See Boston Tea Party. We're not talking a break-in to some innocent store or looting and arson to places that have no government involvement. So you're plainly ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ wrong. And once again as has been explained to you several times no one came in to occupy or hurt anyone, this was never and does not even slightly resemble a riot, let alone a violence assault. So let's back down the conspiracy theories and step back a bit shall we?

BUt, he isn't right either. This country is founded on rebellion against tyrannical states not blood for the blood god. It's not about blood it's about rebellion. We didnt run assassinations we ran boycots, sabatage to government forces, the preparation of weapons for defense against a tyrannical state. It's naive to think blood isn't ever going to be spilled when you sit down and say "no, you move." as a matter of course, but it doesn't mean seeking out the blood of tyrants is a good idea either. We stood our ground, not went over to england to kill the king.

My basic bullet point here is that just because the country was founded due to rebellion, violence and aggression does not answer the question of whether that is justifiable today or not.

Generally speaking, I find it incredibly illogical to suggest that it would be more okay to break places and riot on places that have government involvement, vs private property which is "innocent". You understand that all of that property/place/building with "government involvement" means taxpayers?

So, when some MAGA extremists are breaking those buildings, windows, etc., they are breaking property which the taxpayers paid for and continue to pay for. If anything, those "fiscally responsible" MAGAs should be more concerned about breaking government buildings because that bill is going to land on everyone to pay. If private buildings or property is harmed, that is a private matter and the bill won't land on everyone. This kind of behavior actually goes against what they claim to stand for. How guilty/innocent do you think those taxpayers are?

Therefore I will politely reject any such thinking or implications.

videomike_Ultimate_Plushie님이 먼저 게시:

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

Nothing more? Uh, that is definitely not the full story.

Transcript Of Trump's Speech At Rally Before Capitol Riot
https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial

-> "And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore."

Hell as a word (outside of religious context) refers to destruction, chaos and torment.

Are you okay? Dude, the word "fight" does not mean destroy, maine, and kill. It means challenge, compete, enbattle. Have you never heard "fighting a legal battle?" He was never and has never spoken of violent revolution against the democrat party let alone actively taken part in planning and operating such endevours. And if all you have is the word "fight," well taken out of context for that matter despite even within the quote itself being self-evidently not saying maine & kill, then you need to back off a bit.

I'm not joking on this, your coming off as outright unhinged here. I'm outright concerned for your mental health if you seriously think the word "fight" must by all definitions means destruction and torment.

I'm not saying 'fight' as a single word would imply much. We hear things like "fight for justice" all the time. What I'm saying is that "fight like hell" definitely implies chaos, disorder and destruction. If you are in a perfectly peaceful protest, you are not "fighting like hell". This is simply the fact.

I don't appreciate you suggesting that I have mental health problems. Especially when you are either misunderstanding what I say or you intentionally leave parts of what I said unmentioned.

[Dom]

Jackie Daytona님이 먼저 게시:

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

These are violent extremists that want to tear down the country and its institutions. Democrats may have their own faults to criticize but I have not heard anyone from that side advocating for civil war or trying to justify it.

Really? Because a big part of their mantra is disobeying anyone that isn't a full-blown socialist. Disobeying the police. Disobeying any laws they don't like. Screaming outside of homes of politicians that make decisions they don't like.

Democratic leadership promotes all that. They abuse every rule and twist every fact.

Dems have been making war for some time now. Fostering hate. Via mass psychological manipulation. Through schools, news, and entertainment. Even going so far as to say that you can't be racist to white people. (Which is literally dehumanization.)

Dems aren't calling for civil war? Maybe not, directly. But it's what they want. Through destruction of societal norms. When everything is acceptable? Nothing is tolerated. You can't criticize anything. Because everything is fine.

So, if you have a problem with something? You're the bad guy. Not the person that caused the problem.

I also think that denying one party's nominee from running is the biggest threat to democracy that I've seen in my lifetime.

The mainstream democratic party isn't socialist. At best, they are slightly more center from the GOP. By all global standards, they are still a right-wing party; the left-wing of the country loses the primary elections.

As for breaking societal norms, that would cause Civil War if the people who force norms on other people (the traditionalists) cannot let go and are even willing to use violence to impose their values and beliefs on others. But that is not the fault of the people breaking the norms, that is the fault of people who think that you should be obligated to live based on these norms. Fact is, these people don't believe in freedom. They believe in freedom as long as it's their norms (occurs within the framework of what they consider acceptable).

What is considered normal and what isn't, is not only subjective but the general thinking is also subject to change. The 'normal' things we do in 2023 would've been despicable some hundred years ago.

[Chunk Norris ☯]

Here's mainstream Democrats advocating for violence and a Civil War/Revolution.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhJYHU3ejLc

[Chunk Norris ☯]

More video of Democrats advocating for violence, much of it is highly illegal where they were threatening to insurrection/kill the President.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J31rXRjryFA

"Trumpers watch out, and for those of you who are soldiers...make them pay"-A Peaceful Democrat Politician totally not advocating for normal people to attack/hurt Trump Supporters.

"What we have to do is fight in the streets"-Another totally Peaceful Democrat, totally not advocating for Civil War or rioting.

[Computer]

isn't that what it gets?

[Chunk Norris ☯]

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

Jackie Daytona님이 먼저 게시:

Really? Because a big part of their mantra is disobeying anyone that isn't a full-blown socialist. Disobeying the police. Disobeying any laws they don't like. Screaming outside of homes of politicians that make decisions they don't like.

Democratic leadership promotes all that. They abuse every rule and twist every fact.

Dems have been making war for some time now. Fostering hate. Via mass psychological manipulation. Through schools, news, and entertainment. Even going so far as to say that you can't be racist to white people. (Which is literally dehumanization.)

Dems aren't calling for civil war? Maybe not, directly. But it's what they want. Through destruction of societal norms. When everything is acceptable? Nothing is tolerated. You can't criticize anything. Because everything is fine.

So, if you have a problem with something? You're the bad guy. Not the person that caused the problem.

I also think that denying one party's nominee from running is the biggest threat to democracy that I've seen in my lifetime.

The mainstream democratic party isn't socialist. At best, they are slightly more center from the GOP. By all global standards, they are still a right-wing party; the left-wing of the country loses the primary elections.

As for breaking societal norms, that would cause Civil War if the people who force norms on other people (the traditionalists) cannot let go and are even willing to use violence to impose their values and beliefs on others. But that is not the fault of the people breaking the norms, that is the fault of people who think that you should be obligated to live based on these norms. Fact is, these people don't believe in freedom. They believe in freedom as long as it's their norms (occurs within the framework of what they consider acceptable).

What is considered normal and what isn't, is not only subjective but the general thinking is also subject to change. The 'normal' things we do in 2023 would've been despicable some hundred years ago.

Global standards? Sorry but those other nations are frankly too pathetic to use as the standard...pick any European country and make the case as to why they should be the standard for anything...maybe 50 or 100 years ago you could make that claim, but America is how we do the standards now.

If there's an off-topic about politics the standard is America politics, not some dingy European country that has less people then most of our states.

So no...American left-wingers are socialists and by our standard they're left-wing just like all those other left-wing governments out there.

Finland has 5.5 million, we've had more illegal immigrants cross over our border just during Joe Biden's term then Finland has in the entire nation.

The UK has 63 million....again pathetically small.

As for societal norms...no it's not the traditionalists that would spark any kind of civil war. Jailing one's political opponents for no good reasons...that could spark it...Democrats need to kill the unborn, it could start it and practice eugenics, that could spark it. It's actually very similar to the slavery debate where once again Democrats see a life and thinks less of the life. I've actually heard abortion activists call the unborn fetus 2/3 of a life.

[Sir Seanicus, Esq.]

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

:D님이 먼저 게시:

Sometimes, when all options are exhausted, violence becomes an unfortunate necessity.

The Tree of Liberty must... Oh you know how it goes.

I pray it never quite comes to that, though.

It's hilarious that anyone would think the trumpet is worth it.

Like I legitimately cannot hold my laugh thinking about it...

You know what's funny?

Some Br*tish noble probably said the same thing about the colonies and liberty in the 1770s.

[Groogo]

The Biden presidency is nothing more them Obama's third term and the country is currently under the control of the most corrupt mob of Democrat Politicians since the Democrat Party founded the KKK. They are in significant trouble and the only way that they will retain power is likely going to rely on another contrived mass social disruption.

[Dom]

Sir Seanicus, Esq.님이 먼저 게시:

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

It's hilarious that anyone would think the trumpet is worth it.

Like I legitimately cannot hold my laugh thinking about it...

You know what's funny?

Some Br*tish noble probably said the same thing about the colonies and liberty in the 1770s.

You are comparing the Trumpet to British colonies and liberty in the 1770s?

Yes, I agree, that's very funny!

[Sir Seanicus, Esq.]

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

Sir Seanicus, Esq.님이 먼저 게시:

You know what's funny?

Some Br*tish noble probably said the same thing about the colonies and liberty in the 1770s.

You are comparing the Trumpet to British colonies and liberty in the 1770s?

Yes, I agree, that's very funny!

They probably thought the "ungrateful colonists" fighting for independence was funny too.

[videomike_Ultimate_Plushie]

Sir Seanicus, Esq.님이 먼저 게시:

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

You are comparing the Trumpet to British colonies and liberty in the 1770s?

Yes, I agree, that's very funny!

They probably thought the "ungrateful colonists" fighting for independence was funny too.

They actually did.

[Dom]

Sir Seanicus, Esq.님이 먼저 게시:

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

You are comparing the Trumpet to British colonies and liberty in the 1770s?

Yes, I agree, that's very funny!

They probably thought the "ungrateful colonists" fighting for independence was funny too.

Well, I'm not a mind reader. Especially of people who are long deceased.

But that aside, I suppose we all have our own sense of proportion.